Agenda item

Demolition of one dwellinghouse and erection of 10 new dwelling houses on land to the rear of 79-83 Lower Icknield Way, Chinnor.

The committee considered planning application P23/S0565/FUL for the demolition of 1 dwellinghouse and erection of 10 new dwelling houses on land to the rear of 79-83 Lower Icknield Way, Chinnor, on land at 81 Lower Icknield Way, Chinnor.  

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting. 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application was brought to the committee due to the objection of Chinnor Parish Council.

The planning officer informed the committee that since the publication of the agenda there had been an update to the officer’s report. Oxfordshire County Council clarified that they had withdrawn the education contribution requirement but that contributions to transport and the household wate recycling centre were still a requirement. Therefore, the planning officer clarified that the recommendation would be amended to, ‘to delegate to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, to grant planning permission, subject to the prior completion of A) Section 106 agreement to secure £10,197 for provision of public transport services, £846 for household waste recycling centres, and securing offsite highways improvement works, and B) the conditions listed in the report’.

The application itself was noted as being for the demolition of one dwelling and the building of 10, resulting in a net gain of nine dwellings. The planning officer also discussed the surrounding area, noting the paddock land to the north and the dwellings to the west and east. She also noted that the site was within the settlement area of Chinnor as defined in the neighbourhood plan and that the application had been amended to reduce all the dwellings to two stories but that they were of mixed sizes to meet Local Plan policies.

The planning officer also noted the objections that had been received from the parish council which revolved around the application not being allocated in the made neighbourhood plan and that it was not an infill site. However, the planning officer did consider the site to be infill as, in her opinion, it was contained by surrounding developments. She also noted the councils lack of five-year housing supply and that the site would therefore produce windfall housing.

Following amendments to the application, the planning officer confirmed that the highways authority had no objections to the scheme. In addition, on the local concerns about the ability of schools to cope with the development, the planning officer noted that an expansion of the Mill Lane school was possible and could accommodate the sites growth.

Overall, as the planning officer believed the application was in accordance with the neighbouthood plan, in keeping with the surrounding area, a sustainable site, and positively contributed to the five-year housing land supply, she believed that the application should be approved. 

Councillor Jackie Webb spoke on behalf of Chinnor Parish Council, objecting to the application. 

Peter Brook spoke objecting to the application. 

Peter McCorkell, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application. 

Councillor Ali Gordon-Creed, a local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application. 

The committee asked for clarification about the five-year land supply and how the titled balance in favour of development was engaged as they noted that Chinnor had a neighbourhood plan and they believed that this meant they would only need to demonstrate a three-year land supply. In response the planning officer confirmed that the titled balance would be engaged as the site was in the settlement boundary of Chinnor and therefore not in conflict with the neighbourhood plan, and that permission should be granted unless an application would have significantly and demonstrably negative impacts.

Members highlighted the biodiversity policies of the Chinnor neighbourhood plan as it specified a preference for achieving onsite biodiversity net gain, whereas the application would not achieve this, instead they proposed to purchase credits for offsite biodiversity gain. In response, the planning officer agreed that not providing onsite biodiversity net gain was harmful but that the committee should weigh up these harms against the applications benefits.

In response to a question about the planning history of the site, the head of planning confirmed that there had been applications on the site although they had included the northern paddock which was outside of the Chinnor settlement area. Members also agreed that the application would result in a back land development due to the housing being built further back into the plot than the other houses on Lower Icknield Way.

Members highlighted the potential for flooding caused by additional ground water generated by the development, an issue they knew had already existed for residents in the past. In addition, they expressed concerns about the potential increased runoff being discharged into the nearby chalk stream. The committee did receive assurances that the council’s drainage engineer had no objection to the plans due to the mitigation measures proposed and with the proposed conditions, and that the drainage engineer was aware of the local circumstances regarding groundwater flooding.

The committee expressed concern that the application would not meet the standards of the neighbourhood plan regarding onsite biodiversity net gain as they noted that the scheme would create a biodiversity net loss for the site.  In addition, they believed the application was in further conflict with the neighbourhood plan due to it not being an infill development, as it was an unallocated site set much further back from the other dwellings on Lower Icknield Way.

Members also noted that development of plot 10 would encroach very close to the neighbour and they agreed that this would negatively affect their amenity and be an unneighbourly development. In addition, concern about the ability of local infrastructure to cope with the development, such as school places, was also mentioned.

Overall, as the committee agreed that the application was contrary to the Chinnor neighbourhood plan, specifically around biodiversity net gain and infill developments, and that it adversely impacted neighbouring amenity, they agreed that the application should be refused.

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the application was carried on being put to the vote. 

RESOLVED: to refuse planning application P23/S0565/FUL, for the following reasons:

1.       The proposed development would not be in accordance with the Chinnor Neighbourhood Plan in that it is not on a site allocated in the Plan and it does not constitute infill development. The proposed development would be inappropriate backland development. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policies CH H1, CH H6 and CH H7 of the Chinnor Neighbourhood Plan Review II 2023 and Policy H16 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2035.

2.       That Plot 10 of the proposed development would have an overbearing impact on the garden of No. 85 Icknield Way, which would be unneighbourly and intrusive, contrary to Policy CH H1 of the Chinnor Neighbourhood Plan Review II 2023 and Policy DES6 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2035.

3.       That the development will cause a net loss in biodiversity, for which offsite compensation is proposed rather than seeking to provide for biodiversity net gain on site. The proposed development is therefore not in accordance with Policy CH GP2 of the Chinnor Neighbourhood Plan Review II 2023 and Policy ENV3 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2035.

4.       In the absence of a completed Section 106 legal agreement, the proposed development fails to secure infrastructure necessary to meet the needs of the development.  As such, the proposal is contrary to policies INF1, and TRANS5 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2035.